Preguntas, please?

Remember this: Public questions need an answer. Note: If you are going to use me. I am going to use you; Quid Pro Quo. 

I was perusing; oh, sweet perusing. I am going to use the same picture they used. This was the question-statement I saw:

Why people criticize trophy photos, when in fact anywhere in the world, the first form of art was man drawing himself hunting all over the caves he lived in, boulders he passed, or cliffs he visited.

I figured it was publicly there; anyone could answer.

Simple answer:       

It is the intent, behavior of the discourse, how the image is used, and how it is applied in the negative to another individual.

Ancients writing on walls do not get on the internet and ram a trophy photo in someone’s face as an instigator piece for fighting. It was life or death in those days.

Entitled hunters, using the internet to feed their egos, are detrimental to hunting participants, because they cause problems accentuated by bad behaviors performed on public venues. The common person is being penalized for some action or thought another hunter does in the negative as a collective punishment or rebuttal. What is being done in the trophy hunting world is not life and death for the hunter. A good example would be the state of affairs in Winsconsin, bear hunting, and hunting aggravationists to hunting participants. The online forays bleed out into the real world. If they can't find you on the internet, they look for you where you live. The negative interaction is like a narcotic; addicted people have to get a hit.

Think child sticking the finger in the flame; doesn't understand why it always burns and hurts.

Self-generated crisis is used as a platform to promote hunting online. Hunting can promote hunting. You don’t need to use discrimination unless you are publicizing that media outlet to serve some purpose to make a pseudo-war to garner more attention for revenue and celebrity status.

How the Ancients hunted, and how people hunt today are different mindsets. I highly doubt the Ancients shelled out a cool $100,000 cowrie shells to hunt an animal just for the fun of it. Ancients may have hunted for the fun of it too. I think I read an article that stated early people in America caused a mass extinction from over-hunting. That was before the Spanish, small pox, and religious people acting badly. There was supposedly a lot of people.

This question is an illustration of a person’s inability to understand intent, behavior and outcome. It can also be a mind closed off and not willing to acknowledge the negative effect behavior and action has on the hunting sport and participants. One would have to be accountable for what they have been doing. Just because rock art depicting hunting is there, doesn't make your argument for current trends and behaviors in hunting valid. 

Bottom line: Denial

Think beast, think.

Feel free to go off and write your own answer to this preguntas. 

I would think the Ancients would be a little embarrassed for us at the current view of hunting. They probably would think, "Well, we out did them with a cane and a rock. We walked a 1000 miles with no Wilderness Athlete to keep us strong. How sad are they? You can't do nothing but feel sorry for them and their dependencies."

Written by: It doesn’t matter. I am no one.